[Football] VAR whats worse waiting to celebrate a goal or going one down to an illegal goal?

[Thunder Bolt]

Not every goal is going to be scrutinised by VAR. We scored three goals on Saturday and not one of the three had to be rerun. As far as I can tell the only VAR decision was the possible handball in the wall from the Watford free kick.

 

[southstandandy]

And you're actually ok with that ? Seriously ?



You can, except you don't. Nobody does.

Nothing can beat that rush, that feeling of pure euphoria and elation when the ball hits the back of the net. If we score and the lino's flag is down, then its time to go mental - surely THATS what we go to football for. A chance of experiencing that feeling.

VAR has now robbed us of that. There's a caveat thats been inserted, a doubt. The moment has been diluted, because in the back of your mind, you're aware there's still a chance of the goal being taken away for something so minor it was impossible to notice without a zoomed-in freeze-frame and some lines drawn on.

You HOPE that dreaded big screen message doesn't come up, and then when it does you're in limbo, often clueless as to what it is they're even looking at. Then if its given, its a relief and a token muted "yeeeah" when its confirmed - but the moment has been lost. Spoiled. Diluted.

Its too high a price to pay IMO for a nerdy "his armpit was offside" type call.

No, not desperately happy with that, but if that's the way the game is going then I'll have to just put up with it.

I like the spontaneity of football and that clearly will start to be eroded due to VAR. As the Wolves manager said at the weekend, supporters are now going to start celebrating a goal being disallowed almost more than one being scored. Yes, it will be 'theatre' and whether I like it or not (I don't) the clubs voted for it!

Football is like so many other things in life that are being somewhat homogenized. I personally thought the game was ok as it was but the powers at be seem to want to make changes to it's format every few years.

Many changes have been good such as the back pass rule, off side amendments (active or not), a larger subs bench etc, but others like the 6 second rule for keepers (never enforced) and now this year the keeper being able to play a goal kick within the area to one of his team, or a sub having to leave the field of play nearest to the line they are at supposedly to stop time wasting (but surely the ref can just add on extra time for such previous delaying tactics) seem completely pointless.

I'm not anti change but just think the game doesn't need tweaks or amendments every few years. The fundamentals are fine. God knows what football will be like in 100 years - probably a bit like childrens 'touch rugby', just in football.

 

[Sheebo]

Not being able to see the ball nestle, look over at the linesman and see him with his flag down and absolutely go mental is going to take a lot away from the game IMO, I know people will say it’s important to get decisions right but it’s football as we know it losing a bit of it’s character and what I love about it for me.

Did exactly that with the 3rd on Sat. Half celebrated as knew it was tight! Annoying.

 

[Easy 10]

Not every goal is going to be scrutinised by VAR. We scored three goals on Saturday and not one of the three had to be rerun. As far as I can tell the only VAR decision was the possible handball in the wall from the Watford free kick.

Every goal IS checked by VAR - and Maupays was subject to a review for offside. Celebrations then had to be put on hold while we all watched the big screen for the result of the review. I was alongside the pitch and fully expected a review as it was a fairly tight call in realtime, and after 30 seconds or so, it was given.

But the moment was gone. The days of glancing at the lino and then going stark raving loopy are now over. Thats categorically NOT a good thing IMO.

 

[spence]

And you're actually ok with that ? Seriously ?



You can, except you don't. Nobody does.

Nothing can beat that rush, that feeling of pure euphoria and elation when the ball hits the back of the net. If we score and the lino's flag is down, then its time to go mental - surely THATS what we go to football for. A chance of experiencing that feeling.

VAR has now robbed us of that. There's a caveat thats been inserted, a doubt. The moment has been diluted, because in the back of your mind, you're aware there's still a chance of the goal being taken away for something so minor it was impossible to notice without a zoomed-in freeze-frame and some lines drawn on.

You HOPE that dreaded big screen message doesn't come up, and then when it does you're in limbo, often clueless as to what it is they're even looking at. Then if its given, its a relief and a token muted "yeeeah" when its confirmed - but the moment has been lost. Spoiled. Diluted.

Its too high a price to pay IMO for a nerdy "his armpit was offside" type call.

Perfectly written and exactly how i feel about it all.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Every goal IS checked by VAR - and Maupays was subject to a review for offside. Celebrations then had to be put on hold while we all watched the big screen for the result of the review. I was alongside the pitch and fully expected a review as it was a fairly tight call in realtime, and after 30 seconds or so, it was given.

But the moment was gone. The days of glancing at the lino and then going stark raving loopy are now over. Thats categorically NOT a good thing IMO.

Fair enough, I wasn't at Vicarage Road but there didn't seem to be a delay in the reporting of it.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

Not every goal is going to be scrutinised by VAR. We scored three goals on Saturday and not one of the three had to be rerun. As far as I can tell the only VAR decision was the possible handball in the wall from the Watford free kick.

There were at least 5 VAR checks in that game - each of the goals, the handball claim, and a check for a possible red card against Deeney for a stray elbow.

 

[Triggaaar]

VAR whats worse waiting to celebrate a goal or going one down to an illegal goal?

Going down to an illegal goal is worse. It's not fair, it's not British. I'm still annoyed about Burney's penalty against us, when we should have had a penalty.

Any time we score and the offside decision looks remotely close, I look at the linesman before celebrating. If he's on his way to the centre circle, I start celebrating. Plenty of times our fans cheer only for a mate to grab them and point and the lino. With VAR we're going to see more of that, but it's a price worth paying IMO.

I am in favour of VAR but I am finding difficulty with the millimetre precision being applied to offside, but if we are going to have it then the Goal must be 100% legal. Maybe VAR should only consider clear and obvious offside IE if you need to get out the vernier calipers the goal stands, a bit subjective I know, but no different to handball rules.

The technology tells us whether it thinks it's 1cm (or whatever the measurement is) offside or not. What would you like the rule to be, would you like it to allow a goal unless the attacker is at least 20cm offside? Where would you draw the line, and how would that make it better?

 

[Albion my Albion]

As with anything new we as fans will eventually get acclimated to it's use and it will be normal for fans to look for VAR to kick in and possibly reverse a call. There have been times when referees have reversed calls based on lino decisions. No different.

 

[Triggaaar]

As with anything new we as fans will eventually get acclimated to it's use and it will be normal for fans to look for VAR to kick in and possibly reverse a call. There have been times when referees have reversed calls based on lino decisions. No different.

Agreed, and maybe we'll just have to learn to look at the game better, so we can judge whether something is likely to be ruled out. Some goals are nowhere near offside, and no one from the opposition has hit the ground, so they're really unlikely to be ruled out. We can see when it looks close to offside, so we'll have to wait for a second.

Of course it is a price. It is not perfect. But I'm sure it's a price worth paying.

 

[Nobby]

And you're actually ok with that ? Seriously ?



You can, except you don't. Nobody does.

Nothing can beat that rush, that feeling of pure euphoria and elation when the ball hits the back of the net. If we score and the lino's flag is down, then its time to go mental - surely THATS what we go to football for. A chance of experiencing that feeling.

VAR has now robbed us of that. There's a caveat thats been inserted, a doubt. The moment has been diluted, because in the back of your mind, you're aware there's still a chance of the goal being taken away for something so minor it was impossible to notice without a zoomed-in freeze-frame and some lines drawn on.

You HOPE that dreaded big screen message doesn't come up, and then when it does you're in limbo, often clueless as to what it is they're even looking at. Then if its given, its a relief and a token muted "yeeeah" when its confirmed - but the moment has been lost. Spoiled. Diluted.

Its too high a price to pay IMO for a nerdy "his armpit was offside" type call.

Totally and absolutely and emphatically
THIS

And despite all the discussions above, VAR is not foolproof.
Murray’s handball would have been given in the Champions League but not in the EPL. WHAT

Video referees are under pressure to make a swift decision. And don’t forget, the decision makers are still the same referees that we have had to put up with over the years.

There will still be errors made with VAR.

If it was only used for clear and obvious error we would probably be ok with it.
But That has now been replaced with a potential incident every five minutes.

So for heavy tackles, offsides, every single goal - all I will be watching for, is the ref sticking his finger in his ear - it’s a real mess.

 

[Nobby]

Going down to an illegal goal is worse. It's not fair, it's not British. I'm still annoyed about Burney's penalty against us, when we should have had a penalty.

Any time we score and the offside decision looks remotely close, I look at the linesman before celebrating. If he's on his way to the centre circle, I start celebrating. Plenty of times our fans cheer only for a mate to grab them and point and the lino. With VAR we're going to see more of that, but it's a price worth paying IMO.

The technology tells us whether it thinks it's 1cm (or whatever the measurement is) offside or not. What would you like the rule to be, would you like it to allow a goal unless the attacker is at least 20cm offside? Where would you draw the line, and how would that make it better?

CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERROR by an official

 

[Triggaaar]

CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERROR by an official

What?

 

[Jimmy Grimble]

 

[nickjhs]

Jimmy Grimble, And herein lies the problem. Not sure if there is a suitable fix. Maybe being "robbed" and the endless discussions about "if only the ref......." are part of the game, they certainly were. I know I have hated seeing replays that showed mistakes, even ones that benefited us, and have been calling for VAR for a long time. Maybe it should be like cricket where the offended team gets to call for VAR but they only get a limited number. What is certain is there needs to be discussions about it so that it can be tweaked to work in the way best suited to a fair game and the spectator experience combined.

 

[Audax]

See, the actual point, is that there should NOT be a problem there. If the decision is impossible to call with certainty, using a standard 30fps TV broadcast frame rate, then the batsman should just get the benefit of the doubt.

In cricket, that's generally what does happen. They use the first frame where the bail is clearly dislodged and if the bat is behind the line in that frame, batsman is given Not Out. I have seen a few really close run out decisions where having more frames would probably have resulted in the batsman being given out, but they were mostly from a few years or more ago when there were fewer frames available than today.

I think in the off-side cases we've seen, they could potentially look at putting in something akin to the "umpires call" for LBW laws. Given that a) the frame rates aren't good enough (yet), and b) you're dealing with a 3 dimensional space which can introduce a margin of error unless the camera angle is absolutely perfect ... then, I don't think VAR calling an off-side because the lines have been drawn 1mm apart is the right answer.

Edit to add: Personally, I'd make the off side only apply to the furthest forward foot for each player. I don't see why an attacker should be called off side when they've only got 1mm of armpit ahead of the defender. Especially when that normally happens because the attacker is leaning forward into a run while the defenders are leaning the other way trying to spring an off side trap.

Edit 2: So far, the vast majority of negative reactions I've seen to VAR in the matches played so far have actually been objections to the rules (and/or interpretation of said rules) rather than the VAR. In particular, the handball rulings - I've even heard one pundit claiming the handball rule was changed to make it easier for VAR and therefore VAR sucks ... but I see it differently; VAR exposed the fact that the handball rules were ambiguous and open to individual interpretation, and as a result the application was inconsistent. End result is that the rule needs to be changed to make it clearer and more consistently applied (to be honest, I think they may have failed in that aim given differing interpretations of the new law depending on competition). Yes, I know that the "don't know when to celebrate" argument is about VAR itself but I honestly don't see that as being valid long term. The fans will get used to it. It's been like that in Rugby and Cricket for a long time ... these days, the fans celebrate the event, and then re-celebrate (as appropriate) following the review. It's become a part of the games that already have review systems.

 

[Easy 10]

Agreed, and maybe we'll just have to learn to look at the game better, so we can judge whether something is likely to be ruled out. Some goals are nowhere near offside, and no one from the opposition has hit the ground, so they're really unlikely to be ruled out. We can see when it looks close to offside, so we'll have to wait for a second.

Of course it is a price. It is not perfect. But I'm sure it's a price worth paying.

I'm not. And its not "waiting for a second". A glance at a lino's flag was a second. This is more like 30, holding your breath looking at a giant screen, where previously you'd have been jumping around celebrating.

How on earth do you "learn to look at a game better" ? We're all just watching it in realtime. For me, deciphering whether a players toe or knee was 1mm ahead of the defender is an absolute nonsense. Its completely against the spirit of the game and off the offside law. The forward is gaining absolutely no advantage with those kind of margins, so why have them ?

If there is a mistake and a player scores after being clearly offside then fine, have VAR correct it and rule it out. And by clearly offside, I mean daylight between the last defender and the forward. Thats what VAR is supposed to be for, to correct clear and obvious errors. But if we're getting to forensic levels of scrutiny, then the offside law needs to be tweaked so that if any part of the forwards body is still level with the last defender, then that should be considered onside.

These offside reviews in particular still massively detract from "the moment" though. That unbridled jubilation at scoring is now at least 20% less euphoric, because you know a boffin in a studio at Heathrow is busily looking for a way he can chalk it off for the tiniest of marginal infringement that nobody could possibly have spotted, or would have given a shit about in realtime.

Wonderful.

 

[Triggaaar]

I'm not.

I know. I think VAR can make the game better, you think it's the end of football (apologies if that's not quite what you've said, I don't remember the detail).

And its not "waiting for a second". A glance at a lino's flag was a second. This is more like 30, holding your breath looking at a giant screen, where previously you'd have been jumping around celebrating.

Yes I accept it's not the same. The lino will still flag if he thinks it's offside. If he doesn't flag, loads of people will still celebrate. If, like me, you're a little more cautious, you'll only celebrate if it looked good, and when it's a really tight call you'll hold your breath - exciting stuff.

How on earth do you "learn to look at a game better" ? We're all just watching it in realtime.

Well we don't have to, but we can pay more attention to offside decisions if we choose. To be fair, that is easier for me, as I sit in line with the 18 yard line, and high enough up to have a fair view of the other end. Others won't be in a good position to see. Most will just cheer regardless. How many goals were scored at the weekend, and how many were ruled out by VAR?

For me, deciphering whether a players toe or knee was 1mm ahead of the defender is an absolute nonsense. Its completely against the spirit of the game and off the offside law. The forward is gaining absolutely no advantage with those kind of margins, so why have them ?

Like I said before:

The technology tells us whether it thinks it's 1cm (or whatever the measurement is) offside or not. What would you like the rule to be, would you like it to allow a goal unless the attacker is at least 20cm offside? Where would you draw the line, and how would that make it better?

If there is a mistake and a player scores after being clearly offside then fine, have VAR correct it and rule it out. And by clearly offside, I mean daylight between the last defender and the forward.

Right, so there's your answer to my question above. You'd draw the line at 'daylight' between the players. So we're going to be pausing it and looking at whether it's 1mm of daylight, or not. If it's not, the goal stands, and if it's 1mm, the goal is ruled out. Presumably the daylight has to be between each player's torso. Sometimes there will be 1mm of daylight between the bodies, but the defenders leg will be stretched towards the goal, and may even be ahead of the attacker, meaning that although there is daylight between the players, the striker isn't offside anyway. Or maybe he is by 1mm. I really can't see what you've gained by this change.

Thats what VAR is supposed to be for, to correct clear and obvious errors. But if we're getting to forensic levels of scrutiny, then the offside law needs to be tweaked so that if any part of the forwards body is still level with the last defender, then that should be considered onside.

So we'll be looking at the trailing leg of the striker, and seeing if it overlaps the stretched out front leg of the defender by 1mm. Decisions will be as tight as they are now, but it will give a decent advantage to strikers. The problem with this is that it's really changing the offside law. The current system means even a little offside is offside, but at least it's the same law we've always had, just enforced more accurately. Changing it as you suggest would be strikers don't have to run off the shoulders of the defender, they can actually be ahead of them. If it goes that way I'll be fine with it, but I still don't see the advantage over what we have this season (as I say, it's still going to be mm decisions on whether the feet overlap). Murray would certainly be pleased, but the change would come too late for him.

These offside reviews in particular still massively detract from "the moment" though. That unbridled jubilation at scoring is now at least 20% less euphoric...

But you also know that you're not getting relegated because some shit official couldn't see an obvious offside.

You think it'll be shit. I think it'll be good. We'll see.

 

[Triggaaar]

CLEAR AND OBVIOUS ERROR by an official

And at what point, in your opinion, is it clear and obvious? Put 'clear and obvious' in the rule book and you're going to get extremely different decisions in each game, as it gets interpreted differently. You need to come up with a specific rule.

 

[Acker79]

Don't get me wrong, I celebrate goals, but always think it's often a bit weird. We score in the 7th minute and go crazy. Great. But what if we then concede two? We lost the game and that celebration was wasted. 4-0 down and we get a goal deep into injury time, and the celebration is always muted anyway. 4-0 up and we score again, the celebration lacks an edge, and there's an element of 'sure this is fun, but feel a bit bad for them/their fans this sort of tonking never feels good' or 'this is too easy'. There's already a lot of variance in the enthusiasm of celebrating goals, so we're already cutting down the goals that are affected by the loss of enthusiasm. That's before we address the goal themselves. A lot of them will be quite clearly good goals and the automatic VAR review will be over in seconds.

And as West Ham discovered on Saturday, sometimes your opponents' goal being disallowed will be something new for you cheer, so, maybe you lose a little bit on some of the goals you score, but you gain on some of the ones not conceded.